Talk:Implicit cost
Add topic| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Implicit cost article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the subject of the article. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Remove Contens Box
[edit]Nuff said. Anyone disagree? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gold1618 (talk • contribs) 02:04, 13 March 2010 (UTC)
IMPLICIT COST
[edit]Implicit cost is the imputed or estimated values of factors of production that is owned by the enterprises or buisness organisation and used in their own production process for production of commodities. There are mainly four factors of production;land,labour,capital and entrepreneurship accordingly factor incomes are rent,interst,wages and profits.If a firm hires these various factors of production it has to pay rent for hire of land,price for capital,wages to labour and a part of profit to the entreprenuers for managing the buisness.Now suppose an entrepenur owns land , have invested his own capital and gives valuable managerial services for the upliftment of the firm. Accordingly he should get rent,interst and profits. A firm utilising its own resources dosen't actually pay to itself for utilising those resources.But from economic perspective cost of such resources should be calculated for correct valuation of economic cost because all reources has oppurtunity cost which it has to take in to consideration. (edited by Zeeshan Tarafdar) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 221.135.209.246 (talk • contribs) July 8, 2006
Merge
[edit]Usually I prefer not to interfere in en:WP, since I don't have the language to do so. In this case, however, I can not see any difference in the subjects. They both refer to what I once learned to be Alternative cost. Or is the Implicit cost not really correct? Best regards // Mankash (talk) 05:03, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
- In my experience, the more common term in the US business and economic literature is opportunity cost. I wonder if implicit cost may be a British usage. EastTN (talk) 18:05, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
I've never heard it called implicit cost, always opportunity cost. this goes back to my high school days. mplona (talk) 10:12, 19 Aug 2008 (UTC)
Opportunity cost is the only word I've ever heard used. Don't merge. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.4.231.53 (talk) 22:15, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
I've put a merge to Opp cost tag on it. Which just means the tag will sit there for four+ years. Probably should just AfD it.radek (talk) 01:00, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
Implicit costs and Opportunity costs are different, an explicit cost could be an opportunity cost, because what you are spending on the explicit cost could be spent on something else —Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.224.46.163 (talk) 08:51, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
Implicit cost of capital
[edit]I assume this includes the implicit cost of capital, which should be mentioned in this article, as it seems like another pervasive source of difference between accounting profit and economic profit. Daask (talk) 03:52, 19 December 2025 (UTC)